East Meets West Logic...

[labelwench]

Hello Lloyd,

Your formula twigged a statistic of many years standing, that roughly one fifth of the world's population enjoys three quarters of it's wealth.

Unless we totally flip this ratio, the poor of the world are destined to become ever poorer, to my way of doing math.

Is not trade within a nation considered protectionism?

Trade of goods is a relatively easy thing to measure.

In the near future, our greatest 'import' is likely to be immigrants, as we are in need of workers to maintain deteriorating infrastructure and to design and build the infrastructure of a more environmentally sustainable future.

Who's Gonna Build Your Wall by Tom Russell

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LZkAoosVLkA

"It's the fat cat white developers,
who've created this whole damn squall.."

"...the one thing I most fear,
is a white man in a golf shirt,
with a cell phone in his ear.."

Best regards,
Labelwench

[labelwench]

And then there is the topic of Life Insurance, which according to this source (Wikipedia) had it's origins in the interest of protecting business.

There are so many existing mechanisms that presently exist to skew the odds in the favour of those that possess wealth, that one has to wonder if anything short of global disaster could ever establish a baseline for a new fiscal paradigm.

Insurance began as a way of reducing the risk of traders, as early as 5000 BC in China and 4500 BC in Babylon. Life insurance dates only to ancient Rome; "burial clubs" covered the cost of members' funeral expenses and helped survivors monetarily. Modern life insurance started in 17th century England, originally as insurance for traders: merchants, ship owners and underwriters met to discuss deals at Lloyd's Coffee House, predecessor to the famous Lloyd's of London.

The first insurance company in the United States was formed in Charleston, South Carolina in 1732, but it provided only fire insurance. The sale of life insurance in the U.S. began in the late 1760s. The Presbyterian Synods in Philadelphia and New York created the Corporation for Relief of Poor and Distressed Widows and Children of Presbyterian Ministers in 1759; Episcopalian priests organized a similar fund in 1769. Between 1787 and 1837 more than two dozen life insurance companies were started, but fewer than half a dozen survived.

Prior to the American Civil War, many insurance companies in the United States insured the lives of slaves for their owners. In response to bills passed in California in 2001 and in Illinois in 2003, the companies have been required to search their records for such policies. New York Life for example reported that Nautilus sold 485 slaveholder life insurance policies during a two-year period in the 1840s; they added that their trustees voted to end the sale of such policies 15 years before the Emancipation Proclamation.

[SB_UK]

And then there is the topic of Life Insurance, which according to this source (Wikipedia) had it's origins in the interest of protecting business.

There are so many existing mechanisms that presently exist to skew the odds in the favour of those that possess wealth, that one has to wonder if anything short of global disaster could ever establish a baseline for a new fiscal paradigm.

what would happen to the oceans if the Earth's polarity changed?

Praying for a disaster to protect us from ourselves.

pretty screwy huh?

[SB_UK]

~s~

-- water is diamagnetic, which means that it is slightly repelled when an external magnetic field is applied. Mixing the water with salt or sugar means there are less water molecules in a given space -- so the compound will be slightly less diamagnetic than pure water.

slightly less isn't good enough -

To levitate water, you'd need a giant research electromagnet ... ...

- the planetary magnetic field 'd certainly be considerable.

~s~

"...the Lord saw that the wickedness of man was great in the earth, and that every intent of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually. And the Lord was sorry that He had made man on the earth, and was grieved in His heart. So the Lord said, 'I will blot out man whom I have created from the face of the land, from man to animals to creeping things and to birds of the sky; for I am grieved that I have made them.'"

That kinda' thing
or
Douglas Adam's 'Hitchiker's Guide to the Galaxy' if intent on expression of God hating theme.

Dr Seuss' 'Butter Battle Book' being urgently applicable reading for both sides.

~*~

Homo sapiens sapiens -> Homo neosapiens sapienses.

... ... ... we get better (eventually).


..
Close encounters of the third kind

- climbing a mountain to witness extra terrestrial (viz. God) intelligence.

Often wondered why that movie had such a disturbing feel to it.

[SB_UK]

After pondering on this for a bit, he replied, "Well, and that's fine too, if they have as much fun spending it, as I've had in making it."

General attitude to money over the last 20 years

why do people being paid to perform some task not appear particularly keen on performing that task?

If two people could collaborate and in the process make one of those two people redundant
- though without loss in product availability to people (which is what really matters)
- then we'll observe a net improvement in global communityspace
- will have freed up a pair of hands to contribute something novel.

Currently the system operates in the opposite direction -
people striving to get paid for as little work as possible -
where the fear of redundancy (and not being paid)
results in people protecting their own jobs by increasing the bureaucratic load which they themselves're under
- and then making the extra bureaucracy legally binding

- hence safe guarding their positions of work.

People make their own lives miserable in order to ensure that they've enough money to stay afloat.

The guaranteed one~wage (zero wage or free survival necessities (water,food,heat)) ideas are simply aimed at killing off instead of encouraging poor (fear engineered) practices.

Wouldn't it be nice if we could lift the anxiety which financial industries (particularly the insurance sector) thrives through placing people under?

But what if ... ... ... ? ... ... ...

Why didn't people begin to wake up on the collapse of AIG?

The lady with a crystal ball replaced by the sign:
'closed due to unforeseen circumstances'
in her usual seat.

~*~

catching up (still 2 pages behind)
- Lloyd's next post (2 pages back) looks interesting.

[SB_UK]

... as even Karl Marx finally realized...rrr

..
...............'like duh!'
.............'like duh!'

[labelwench]

what would happen to the oceans if the Earth's polarity changed?

Praying for a disaster to protect us from ourselves.

pretty screwy huh?

And you may be sure that most insurance companies carry a rider that affords them an 'out' in the case of 'natural disaster and Acts of God', relying instead on government money to pick up the tab in such case.

The irony there, is that government money is collected from the people in the first place. Meanwhile, the 'extra' you have been paying to an insurance company is more about emotional security.

Insurance has many applicable benefits, but not all policies are equal. It behooves anyone who is paying for insurance to have a complete understanding of the limits of their policy, even if it means taking your policy to a consumer advocacy office for interpretation.

Insurance policies are usually written in the language of law.

Therefore, Buyer Beware.

[SB_UK]

Meanwhile, the 'extra' you have been paying to an insurance company is more about emotional security.

Emotional security which we would have if insurance companies didn't spend so much money in forms of advertising which (reading between the lines of their ad campaigns) serve to destabilize our lives.

When something actually does goes wrong -
- a larger than average natural disaster (for instance)

- they will find a way of wriggling out from liability
- liability being the legal term for

'we'll scratch your backs if ... ... '

[Lloyd Gillespie]

You asked; 'Is not trade within a nation considered protectionism?' No, trade within a nation is the natural necessity of getting fresh produce from Florida and Calif. in the hard Northeast winters, or up to Whitehorse where you are, etc., etc. Nationalism is when external trade is blocked by high tariffs, which many nations are now practicing with imbalanced currencies, and their supporting of this practice, such as China is doing, dis-advantaging America in our trade and off-shoring practices with China. Pure nationalism would be excessive direct duty taxes protecting one's national products and blocking other's products from entering.

Though currency imbalances do this same process much more effectively, the economic academic pinheads, running the show, are yet to admit this Fact. That's why I posted so much about currencies and PPP's(purchasing price parities, including currencies), a few pages back. For local and global trade to function properly and fairly, all government's need internationally re-align their currencies, more than any other factor to even begin to resolve the world's problems, then internal prices would have to be re-aligned by laws also, to balance with a possible currency re-balancing. This is the dream of most all heterodox economists, but the orthodox pinhead economists out-number us heterodox economists about 10 to 1, even after the proofs of last Sept. `08 clearly show the collapse of that fraudulent mathematical mindset. It'll most likely take another year or two for the heterodox schools of ideas to work their way to the top, as it is happening as I write__But we need the support of Obama, but he's a lawyer trying to learn economics, with many bad advisors, and he's not yet listening to his heterodox advisors, such as Paul Volker, as he said so on Charlie Rose just last week.

So, time will tell if the wise minds can finally float to the top or not...

And I agree with you on the immigrants question, as I've written so on my blogs, in the past. I've even stated we need them to support our ridiculous over-spending_on wars, etc._tax base, for future retirees, plus all the other over-expenses__Under the present system, that is__So, let's help change this ridiculous system to a Mathematical government, thus removing the stupidity, and granting a true and pure, yet fully incentivized, Mathematical(sensible simple geometric maths) liberty for all our citizens, instead of the priviledged few__Mathematical equality and true Mathematical rights for all__Now...

That way, we remove the ridiculous human equation from our decisions, in its most critical of areas__Government Power__Mathematize it, sensibly balanced for all...rrr

Sorry for the tirade, but it's needed...

Is not trade within a nation considered protectionism?

Trade of goods is a relatively easy thing to measure.

In the near future, our greatest 'import' is likely to be immigrants, as we are in need of workers to maintain deteriorating infrastructure and to design and build the infrastructure of a more environmentally sustainable future.
Labelwench

[Lloyd Gillespie]

Yeah Sb, years ago my favorite character, Ol' Groucho...rrr

..
...............'like duh!'
.............'like duh!'

Look at the triadic logic's extreme simplicity__We gotta tax greed into extinction, with sliding time scale law structures_spaced out over a ten year time-frame_so we don't collapse the debt-system_down around our ears__Every-Body's gotta eat...rrr

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ukb68yRI_8k&feature=related